Why do people in the USA do this?

How about this-up here in canada our freely elected democratic government has decided to change the census forms.until now, one could select "canadian" as Racial/ethnic origin, among others such as irish-canadian, italo-canadian, african-canadian, etc.but in the last census, apparently too many people decided that they wer only canadian, so next census we won't have that option.we'll have to help perpetuate divisions in a complex, fragile society.like we don't have enough problems with political-correctness and shit like that.(whoa- nearly got excited there..)

quote:Originally posted by shlide:You may have forgotten that long before the African slave trade market opened up in the USA, that warring (sp?) African nations took slaves when they won a battle. That's where America's first African slaves came from. They were already slaves of an opposing African tribe. You also have to realize that currently there is as much discrimination in Africa (based on Nationality) as there is in the USA (based on skin color). So I see no reason for "black pride" to hold more merit than "white pride". There has been oppression and attempts at genocide in both sides histories.

Dude, that's a lame-ass excuse. Which is worse, taking a few slaves during a battle or systematically opressing a MAJORITY of people. Africans had a tradition which was a lot like other cultures: Romans, Greeks ("birthplace of democracy"), etc. Europeans made it a business, though, and Americans made it a lifestyle.

Also, let's look at the history of North America. Europeans landed and decimated the native population via rape, pillaging, murder, massacre, biological warfare (blankets infected with smallpox), divide/conquer, cultural assimilation, and all because they thought the land was *theirs*. They thought that God had given North America (hell, the entire world) to white people, and therefore it was ok to get rid of those damn Injuns.

Yes, Native Americans fought with each other, and yes Africans took slaves, but I hardly see that as excusing what white people have done to non-whites. One is a nasty tradition, the other is just plain evil. No, it's not fun to think about, and yes, it does make you feel guilty. This is good: it will make you (hopefully) think about current injustices and how to fix them.

Also, South Africans would be European-South Africans. They're South Africans of European descent, just as African-Americans are Americans of African descent. While some people take "political correctness" too far, I think it's stupid to completely reject honoring people's wishes about what they'd like to be called. Some people prefer black, others African-American. There isn't a committee deciding this, it's a personal choice. People who jump down your throat when you call them something they don't like are called "assholes," not "politically correct."

Also, South Africans would be European-South Africans. They're South Africans of European descent, just as African-Americans are Americans of African descent.

If I was born in South Africa, I would say that I was a African American. I don't count the generations to see if I can conisder myself a native or an foreigner. It doesn't matter how long my ethnic group has been there. It is MY native country. Race never enters the equation.

big trouble is; so many yanks think 'america/US' is the world...just drop the 'american' shit.n. be people...little individual people among the 'teeming-millions' diversity. who cares if you're in the US or China:socio-political exigencies dictate differencisms everywhere...

stop whining bout it...learn to tolerate and embrace heterogeneity.......homophobia is often the trait of the most homogeneic minds...'bum-fuckers are ok if they are bum-fuckers of our own kind'..kinda stuff.

one thing i've noticed about US attitudes is that the US gladly bombs any other territory on earth, but has never suffered any bombs delivered uponitself...... is that why yanks are basically unaware of being a part of a larger world that is real, inhabited, and with many wills to self-determination? ..and self-identity?

....Orwell wrote about the US...not the failed Russia.... the 'evil empire' was not defeated... .. .. ..global-supremacy and domination,uni-domination, is present as ever... differentiate yourself as best you might before the 'fire-brigade' comes to burn your books and e-books.(Ray Bradbury; Farenheit451)... keep difference alive!

incestuous monopolistic xenophobic monoculturalism is the unique blight of technologically advanced globalism we face now. give plurality every help you can.. be individual.. be creative and fertile, not just a consumerconsuming bland banalities of base bestiality.. seek and revel in difference! ...or live forever chained in servitude to a M$/Intel-likeworld..... 'where(will we tell you)you want to go today'

not everyone has to be middle-class white trash male insecure and envious.. ..in fact, no-one has to be, if he grows up and gets 'wired' to reality and joins the diversity life offers when he uses his brain to think and decide for himself, and get out and do it!(not just watchin n whinging' bout who else gets what) So fukkin GOOD to not-just-americans!!!!!!!!

dingobear, what in the hell did you say? And how did bombing of other countries come into play? And what about gays/homos/what-ever-is-PC-today-for-queers come into play also? My best freind is a dyke, and you better call her that or she will kick your ass. And she doesn't get at the PC names for "gays"

THANKS FOR RESPONDING. i'm getting the drift from this thread that some people are not happy with recognition of difference and individuality....

that dyke friend of yours might see my point that the force of compliance to 'normality' is something to heave against...like you said...she'd kick your ass if you dont aknowledge who/what she is..dont call her...

what i'm sayin is.. accept difference...dont try to demonise it, and dont try to 'conform' it to something else you can homogenize into your'normative structures'.....

what's wrong with bein ethnically different? ..and acknowledging it?

the underlying thing in this thread, like many others of its kind, is..envy that someone might get a benefit "I don't" ...not recognition that most of the time a person'of difference' is at a disadvantage by the fact of the normative structures of social intercourse.

i dont need to explain the bombing things...u know the US bombs aything that wont conform... stuff about 'PC' anything ,gay or straight, is pure bullshit too: some'd kill anything that doesnt play their game their way when it suits them.... it's often the 'american' way.,.... what u are contesting me on is: how can "dingobear" object to people complaining that those who claim a 'special case' can get recognition while you can claim none?..........because u probably receive favourable treatment per se' in any case and you dont exhibit any redeemable aspects to differentiate yourself from any other contenders in whatever it is you persue.....

why do you complain? dont you have an identity beyond'american'?...american american isnt good enuff then? wtf? ..if american is so good and you're so special, then why dont you see it as people only claiming half of that grand 'american' status?

.....fuck this thread is the proof of that study that incompetents see themselves as superior.......wankers, by definition.....

so....you are a worthless piece of nothing just like the rest of us.,.. get used to it. But please try to be different.......

Well dingo, do you go by English? I mean if you are from aussie land, and you aren't native, or from another country, you can't be a aussie, you would be something else correct?But what I want to get at is this.NO SPECIAL RIGHTS FOR SOMEONE BEUASE OF THEIR RACE. Or think of it this way, if you are black or hispainic, you don't have to get the same test scores to get into college as a white OR ASIAN person. That's right. If you are white or Asian (unless you are Hmong) you don't get this magical break. Why is that fair? Way is it far for someone to score less on something and get the spot in college or someone else? Me, I want to get rid of the little thing on all tests that say "race" and "sex" It isn't needed.

Daisuke, I second "NO SPECIAL RIGHTS FOR SOMEONE BEUASE OF THEIR RACE".

Coda, How can you say that America made slavery a lifestyle and that in Africa it was only a tradition?! It was HOW THEY LIVED and HOW THEY FOUGHT WARS! How is that not a lifestlye? Yeah, Europeans went about trashing Native American cuz they felt God gave them the land. I'm not arguing that. I am arguing that 'civilized' (American) slavery is no worse than 'tribal' (African) slavery. They are both horrible! Just because Africans enslaved people of similar skin-color to themselves doesn't make it any nicer. I don't see how you can say otherwise. And I know how I go about fixing the current injustices that I see. I do the only thing I can and that's treat EVERYBODY equal. Their cultural past has no impact on how I treat them. Try it sometime.

Maybe you missed it in my last post, but the first African slaves in America were SOLD BY OTHER AFRICANS TO THE AMERICANS. How can you justify that with "it's the tradition"?

I am a tangerine eater and I can't stand Grapefruit eaters. Grapefruit eaters are not a majority yet, but they are growing in political power. Luckily we, tangerine eaters, passed a law that all local elections be held on Holy Grapefruit Day. Grapefruit eaters must fast and pray the entire day, which will keep them from voting. You might think this is unfair, but they could vote if they chose. If they didn't identify with being Grapefruit eaters so much, they could fully participate in local government.

Word of this got to the State government and they sent someone to investigate. They started asking us if we were tangerine eaters or Grapefruit eaters. I told them that my citrus preference was none of their business. We should all think of ourselves as citrus consumers, not quibble about who's in which subgroup.

Now the Grapefruit eaters are insisting we call them Grapefruit-Citrus Eaters. We now have to set aside a portion of the Citrus Scholarship fund for Grapefruit-Citrus Eaters based on the percentage of Grapefruit-Citrus Eaters to the total population. This is totally unfair. Sure when the Tangerine Eaters had total power only the rare Grapefruit-Citrus Eater qualified for a scholarship. Sure the predominately Grapefruit-Citrus Eater schools were underfunded, but that doesn't justify giving them special priviledges now.

If people harm others because they are a member of a certain group, how do you remedy the harm without taking that into account? The laws are there to stop and remedy the harm of institutional discrimination. You are to be praised for treating everyone the same despite differences. You have stopped discrimination on an individual level, now it's time to stop it on an institutional level. I would suggest you come up with a better way to combat institutional discrimination before you do away with the existing measures you find so odious.

As so what you are saying is we should give these people a break not on merit or anything else, just because that are X. Am I correct? And people who think that a "hate" crime is even worse then a "normal" crime are quite foolish.All crimes are acts of hate in one manner or another. So is allowing one someone not to do as much, or as well as another, yet they get the job, money, class, etc.And why is it OK to support group A and group B but not the evil group C or the smaller of all the groups D? Don't you find it funny that two races can't play "fair" and two can? Even if one of the races was shipped over here on boat, taken away from their families, and not to see their loved ones for years, or ever to work in a job that no one wanted, but needed to be done?Oh yeah, I'm talking about the Irish and the Chinese who built the railroads.

FR*, I admit that I don't know how to battle discrimination on an institutional level. I do know that have the pendulum swng the other direction is no solution. By the time the pendulum settles down, both sides will have memories of discrimination. That, to me, is not a better situation. Programs that aid minorities just becuase they are minorities are discriminatory (or 'reverse-discriminatory' if you prefer the ridiculous PC term). How can more discrimination lead to equality? When I applied to colleges, I knew a lot of people trying to get into UC Berkeley. However, a higher percentage of the 'minorities' got accepted (at Berkeley, white and asian are both considered majority). All the people were on the same level intellectually and most were applying for Electrical Engg and Computer Science. Those that were of the 'majority' that were not accepted were most likely not accepted because the 'majority' quota was reached. The 'minorities' made it easily because their racial quota was not filled yet (and yes, the had most of the qualifications as well). To me, that's discrimination and it should be done away with. Thankfully, the rest of California agreed and finally removed Discriminatory-Action (I mean Affirmative-Action (doesn't it sound like a good thing with the latter name)) from the public University system.

While I am all for equality, I don't see how shifting the discrimination will bring it about.

But the average white person is born with more privileges than the average black person. How do we fix that? If everyone's equal, but someone gets a head start, the person with the head start will win. How do you change this? Or do you just ignore it?

quote:How can you say that America made slavery a lifestyle and that in Africa it was only a tradition?! It was HOW THEY LIVED and HOW THEY FOUGHT WARS! How is that not a lifestlye? Yeah, Europeans went about trashing Native American cuz they felt God gave them the land. I'm not arguing that. I am arguing that 'civilized' (American) slavery is no worse than 'tribal' (African) slavery. They are both horrible! Just because Africans enslaved people of similar skin-color to themselves doesn't make it any nicer. I don't see how you can say otherwise. And I know how I go about fixing the current injustices that I see. I do the only thing I can and that's treat EVERYBODY equal. Their cultural past has no impact on how I treat them. Try it sometime.

Hey, nice insinuation that I don't treat people equally. That's not at all the subject at hand. I was talking about why the connotative definition of "white pride" is less savory than the connotative definition of "black pride."

And you seem to be arguing that scale doesn't matter. I don't see how you can equate a brutal (but common) practice with making a business out of enslaving other people. I'm not saying that slavery is OK if done on a small enough level, I'm saying that it gets worse as it gets bigger. Murder is horrible, pogroms are far worse.

Oddly enough, this has nothing to do with why people don't like the phrase "white pride." Can you say "strawman"? I knew you could!

White pride was used to justify the eradication of Native Americans. That, IMHO, is enough to taint it for generations to come. What next, will you point out that Native Americans were no angels?

quote:Maybe you missed it in my last post, but the first African slaves in America were SOLD BY OTHER AFRICANS TO THE AMERICANS. How can you justify that with "it's the tradition"?

I'm not justifying it, I'm saying that it's not as evil as the systematic oppression of an entire race for purely economic reasons. Can we agree that scale matters when we consider how atrocious acts are? Nuking NYC is worse than mugging an old lady, right? So building an empire on the backs of slaves is worse than taking a few slaves.

Just about every culture takes prisoners during times of war, and until recently, those prisoners were slaves. That is a brutal commonality of humans, or at least humans that wage war.

Few cultures enslave entire races for economic reasons. Fewer still rule an oppressed majority from the seat of power.

Changing subjects, I think most people need a refresher course on the Civil Rights movement. It wasn't ages ago, and blacks didn't get their freedom when Lincoln "freed the slaves." The tail end of the Civil Rights movement was less than 30 years ago. To assume that we've gone from lynchings to equality of opportunity in that short span of time is, IMNSHO, crap. To completely ignore race is to accept the status quo as just and fair, which it is obviously not.

quote:(or 'reverse-discriminatory' if you prefer the ridiculous PC term)

The only people I have heard use "reverse-discrimination" are skinheads and racists. Discrimination is defined as "Treatment or consideration based on class or category rather than individual merit". Discrimination doesn't have a direction, so it can't be reversed. Let's not create different names for white->non-white hate and non-white->white hate. They're the same thing: discrimination.

Mostly, it has been my experience that people concerned with "Racial Naming" have some sort of weird low-self-esteem kick going.

White Power types spring to mind, but I can make the same call on Black Nationalists, or whatever.

Now, although there is always great danger in generalizing from the specific (the 'anecdote is evidence' paradigm of which many Ars-ians are quite fond of) take me, for example. You think Tiger Woods and Mariah Carrey got weird-o genetics? If those two had children, then those children would be almost as genetically diverse as me.....

It's a matter of perspective, in some sense. I grew up in Shitkicker, MD, and many were not sure what I 'was' (as if my 'being' was determined by my skin color), but I wasn't white, and it was made clear to me, often painfully.

Then, I went to the University of Maryland in pretty-damnurban College Park (outside of DC), and suddenly I 'passed', as they say. My new friends just assumed I was white. And I got heat from the ethnic groups on campus when I tried to get involved.....

So, first thing: For any half informed twit who thinks some other race group in the US is living on easy street (even whitey), think again. Your own identification with race neccesarily clouds your judgement from seeing the full picture. The real strata in this country is not determined by race, but by economics.

Second thing: Any socio-economic policies in this country no matter how well meaning, must neccessarily apply restictions on a class basis, not an individual one. As such, they must be viewed with extreme suspicion, that the greater good recieved is much greater than the damage they do. After all, in a theortical sense, the Government is a relationship construed on the power balance between the people as individuals (and I hate this, becuase it flies in the face of my anti-gun rhetoric, but that is a thread for another day) and the governement it creates. (Leaving out the fact that founding documents do spell out two minority groups: "3/5ths of all others" and "Indians not taxed").......

Daisuke;as it happens i have reason to believe there may be aboriginal blood in my line, along with the english/scottish and german...so i come from the original inhabitants, the second fleet of white invaders, and the free immigrants who came here for the gold-rushes of the 1850's....born'n'bred here..i guess i identify myself with the place and its history.

and because i recognise the disadvantage and destruction heaped on the non-whites and non-british in this country i applaud the humble measures being made to redress those injustices. your rhetoric rings familiar with the 'Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party' bilious bullshit we've had going on here.. i suspect these conspiracy theories about college entry being given to lower-scoring persons because of race derives from ignorance rather than fact. all such entry is indeed achieved by quota systems, and certain statistical factorisers may be applied to reach true proportional representation and equity... but if you are white and didnt gain entry to college, i'd say it's more likely that you were not a high enough score yourself, and it was probably other whites who scored better than you who 'deprived' you of 'your place'. thousands apply, hundreds get in... millions never get the opportunity to even apply. get a perspective. be grateful if you had a highschool education, many don't even get that! nobody took anything from you. you didnt lose something you never had. life isn't fair. deal with it. ask some black/hispanic born in a ghetto of poverty crime abuse and neglect...... and count the 'magical breaks' you've had.

"Magical breaks" eh?How do you know that I am not some kind person who lives in a ghetto? You don't have a clue about my race. So might I ask where "poor white trash" comes from? I mean, just because they are white, they MUST HAVE more breaks then the other races out there right?I live in a area that has about 10-12% unemployment. And we have alot of different races here, and we are all poor.Funny isn't it, you take away money and we can all laugh about being poor, and not the color of our skin.

Coda, I most definitely agree that the term 'reverse-discrimination' is ridiculous and truly has no meaning. And I am well aware that when Lincoln 'freed' the slaves that they did not get freedom then.

I think I'll return the empty compliment for the 'straw man' remark (which by the way is two words, not one). In fact, I think I'll even return the monikor to you. Since, in your words:

"I'm not saying that slavery is OK if done on a small enough level, I'm saying that it gets worse as it gets bigger"

you seem to imply to me that slavery gets better, the smaller the scope. You must be one of those people who settles for little gains aren't you? Sometimes incremental change dosen't make things better. If it did, people would not be still complaining about racism. Yes genocide is horrible, but murder isn't any better or nicer just because it's on a small scale. Where do you draw the line? How many people would have to die before you thought the killer was "far worse" than just "horrible".

And referring again to warring African tribes, how can you imply that slaves were not used for economic reasons. Were they just kept as prisoners and not forced to work? I highly doubt that. Slaves work. That's what the term means. Work flows into an economy. Therefore slavery has economic underpinnings. It's kinda simple really.

Daisuke, Good economic example with "poor white trash". Like Dajjal said, it's based mainly on economics.

Those "certain statistical factorisers may be applied to reach true proportional representation and equity" are probably culturally biased. And that quota you're talking about is discriminatory. The school is limiting the number of 'white' or 'asian' students in an effort to create 'equality'. Well what happens when a 'minority' student who is more qualified than a 'minority' student is turned down while the 'minority' student is accepted? Isn't that discriminating against the better qualified applicant? Why should that be illegal in the work place, but perfectly allowable in education? I wish everybody would just not put race down on applications (since it's not mandatory). That would be a good start in levelling the playing field.

--shlide

Edit: Fixed the link. Also, I apologize, the link is not specific to UC Berekely. Upon further research, the link reflects incmoning freshman for all of the University of California system's schools. I'll try to find Berkeley specific information.

It is unbelievable to me that people who will likely go their entire lives without experiencing discrimination because of their race will rail about the injustice of affirmative action. We, (whites), intentionally, systematically, institutionally, over hundreds of years, created the inequalities that minorities are still suffering from today. Yet now, because one out of every hundred cases of discrimination may happen to us, (white males), we suddenly discover that race or sex is not a legitimate reason to deny people rights or opportunity.

How do you know you have never benefited from being white? If any of your forebears got ahead because more capable minorities were not allowed to compete with them, you may still be reaping those rewards. The biggest indicator of whether or not you will attend college is whether or not your parents did. Therefore if minorities had little or no chance of going to college because of government imposed racism we have effectively tilted the playing field for more than one generation. Certainly today virtually anyone can partake in the opportunities available in this country, however; that does not mean those opportunities are equally available to everyone. For some, they require much more effort and resolve. Furthermore, the simple truth is that most of us, (humans), will NOT excel. We will not put forth extraordinary effort. Most of us will climb only a little above where we start.

If you were raised by college educated parents, who themselves were raised by college educated parents you have started with an advantage almost all minorities were denied. You have therefore only lived up to expectations if you yourself get a degree. You may have worked hard for it, but in all likelihood your parents understood the importance of college AND how to prepare you for it. Even if that scenario did not aplly to you, at some point your forebears probably looked at the successful people they knew, or the people they worked for and considered how they could help their children become like them. Most minorities looked at the people they worked for and the successful people around them and knew that as long as their children were minorities, they would likely not have the chance to succeed.

You may be morally correct in stating that affirmative action is discriminatory, yet it hardly fits the primary definition of racism. Rascism's primary definition is: (from dictionary.com) - The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others. Moreover, any complaints about the inequalities of affirmative action which do not include an effective alternative method to redress the wrongs which created the societal injustice minorities face today are simply the whinings of spoiled hypocrites too ingnorant or arrogant to realize they have probably benefited from rascism much more than they will ever suffer from it.

First off, I'm part of the first generation of my family to attend and graduate college. By first generation, I mean my cousins & siblings and I that are roughly the same age and are all on the same level of the family tree. There are no other branches that have made it to college. I didn't have that "benefit" of which you speak.

Calling affirmative-action discriminatory is also technically correct since dictionary.com lists one of it's definitions as "manifesting partiality". Since affirmative-action is based on race, it is racial discrimination. And if you look at dictionary.com's alternate definition of 'racism' (2.Discrimination or prejudice based on race.) you see that affirmative-action is indeed racist.

And I have seen discrimination in my life. Admittedly, not on a scale like being turned down for a job based on race. But when I started college I looked around for scholarships. I was amazed at how many I thought were available to me. Until I read that I was excluded because of my race. Instead, I now have about $20K + interest in loans that I have to pay back. I've rarely seen a more offending remark than:"at some point your forebears probably looked at the successful people they knew, or the people they worked for and considered how they could help their children become like them. Most minorities looked at the people they worked for and the successful people around them and knew that as long as their children were minorities, they would likely not have the chance to succeed."

Give minority parents a break. They are not stupid. They try to teach their children how to succeed just like like majority parents do. I've seen minority parents instill a much better/stronger work ethic in their children than most majority parents will. That may be so that the children will 'rise above' the racism the parents see, but the work ethic is still there.

Just because I can identify a problem, but, unfortunately, cannot immediately supply a solution I'm categorized as a whiny, ignorant hypocrite? I think not. The first step to solving a problem is identifying it. If the world waited to identify a problem only after a solution was found, nothing would ever get done. Awareness must first be raised so that more people think about the issue and hopefully come up with a solution. Telling me to stop idenifying the problem does more to propogate racism than me being unable to come up with an institutional solution.

quote:Originally posted by setaanbomb:Exactly. As a middle class white male, I am subject to numerous limitations on job promotions. If I had to decide between being in the majority or minority in the US, I would choose minority. You qualify for tons of benefits.

I on the other hand am a talented middle class white male, and have received many job promotions.

shlide:quote:And I have seen discrimination in my life. Admittedly, not on a scale like being turned down for a job based on race. But when I started college I looked around for scholarships. I was amazed at how many I thought were available to me. Until I read that I was excluded because of my race. Instead, I now have about $20K + interest in loans that I have to pay back.

So sorry your feeling of entitlement to a free education was mistaken. Wow, you actually had to pay for the education you received and that is somehow discrimination? I cannot see who has more scholarship opportunities as a sign of discrimination. Do you not see that having to pay for college is in no way comparable to being denied the choice of even attending college? Certainly you can say that TODAY a minority can go to college if they choose, but I think you can see how their parents being denied that choice can lower the odds of that happening.

quote:Give minority parents a break. They are not stupid. They try to teach their children how to succeed just like like majority parents do. I've seen minority parents instill a much better/stronger work ethic in their children than most majority parents will. That may be so that the children will 'rise above' the racism the parents see, but the work ethic is still there.

I am going to assume you are not 150 years old, which means you have seen how minority parents raise there kids TODAY when the opportunities ARE available to them. However, that parenting a few generations ago probably did not stress the importance of education to the extent white parenting did. Sure, most, if not all, minority parents raised their kids to succeed in the past as well. That probably included a strong work ethic, but more often than not the goal was not likely to be to prepare their children to go to college or to assume positions of authority, (managers, foremen, etc.) Perhaps you would discount the importance of parents in shaping the choices their child makes in life? I would be surprised if you did not receive some encouragement from your parents that led to your desire to go to college. I am NOT saying you would not have gone to college without that encouragement, just that if you had gotten your degree without your parents helping to shape that goal you would be the exception rather than the rule.

quote:Just because I can identify a problem, but, unfortunately, cannot immediately supply a solution I'm categorized as a whiny, ignorant hypocrite?

I don't think you have correctly identified the problem. You are calling the solution the problem. Viewed as strictly addressing black/white discrimination, (which is the primary goal of affirmative action), the discrimination you claim to want to eliminate can affect no more than 12% of the white population. This assumes that the entire black population will somehow take something from you which you deserved more based solely on their race. Obviously, nowhere near that percentage of white people will have opportunities denied them, and just as obviously more than 12% of black people will face discrimination which limits their opportunities. Yet, you still see the discrimination YOU might potentially face as the problem.

I have experienced a much more insidious, (to me anyway), form of "racism" as recently as the late 80's when interviewing for a job. I was about to be offered a job with a large company when I was asked if I could work for a black man. The fact that I would be asked that question clearly demonstrated to me that this company had had problems with white employees working for black supervisors, which would certainly impede a black employee's rise through management. Think about that, not only does the racism you face from above hurt you, the racism of people not as skilled or competent as you can hurt you. After all, you can't weed out all the potential racists who lower the productivity of a group under a black manager, so you will find it hard to keep promoting him or her. More than that, I would think that incidents of racism by businesses like what happened with Denny's or the Texaco board much more recently would prove that the attitudes of both those in charge and those at the bottom have not necessarily changed all that much.

So what you are saying Bishop is that blacks can't compete in the college world when playing on a level field? Why is that? How can a FOB asian go to college here? Am I missing something?What really pisses me off when I pay 30% of my wages in taxes, then I can't get any grant money to go TO college.

Bishop, I do not feel that I was entitled to a free education. I am not claiming that because I paid my way through school that I was discriminated against. I am saying that there are specific grants/scholarships out there that are RESERVED for minority students. This, by definition, excludes me because of my race. Is that not racially discriminatory?

In your first two paragraphs (not counting the quotes of my previous post), you seem to say that today minorities have just as many college opportunities as majority students and that minority parents today teach their kids along the same lines as majority parents. I agree with that and it's why I feel programs like affirmative-action are no longer necessary.

Personally, ever since I can remember, I've always planned on attending college. I asked my parents about how they influenced my decision to go to college one time. They replied that they thought it was something I wanted to do. They never brought it up. I think that in today's world, society is what prompts some (possibly most, but not necessarily all) kids to want to go to college when they "grow up". The parents, then, may (or may not) add to what society and school teaches. I admit, this is a very subjective area and these are just my thoughts on it.

Just to let you know, Affirmative-Action's primary goal is not black/white, it's minority/majority. It 'aids' minorities in getting college acceptances by lowering the required scores. I wish I knew where the numbers were, but in the University of California system (under Affirmative-Action), a higher percentage of Freshman dropouts were minorities. They found that this was because the students could not truly handle the academic load, but were admitted under Affirmative-Action laws. I'd guess that that hurts the student pretty bad mentally and emotionally. I'd hate to be told I could do something, then given the opportunity to do it, only to find out that everybody knew (and somewhat expected) that I would fail. Granted this does not affect all minority students, but does that make it right?

I spoke with many of my minority friends while in high school (which by the way was very diverse: 25% Hispanic, 22% Asian, 20% White, 18% Filipino, 13% Black, 2% Am. Indian/Pacific Islander (these are current numbers and I've been out of school for about 4 years, the numbers haven't changed much)). The majority of my friends were 'minorities'. Anyway, I asked them how they felt about Affirmative-Action. Nearly all of them despised it. They felt it was offensive to minorities (the fact that enterance requirements were lower for them). They didn't like having to live with the thought that they might not have gotten into college on their merit. They were robbed of that satisfaction.

For the record, I do NOT see "see the discrimination [I] might potentially face as the problem". I see the fact that there is discrimination against anybody as the problem. Neither side (not majority nor minority) has the moral high ground in my opinion.

I am sorry that you witnessed such discrimination and I realize that only a handful of years has passed since then. I agree that racism for any angle can hamper opportunities. Keep in mind that those who lowered productivity under the black supervisor were probably not promoted above him. Also, apparently the company was smart enough to realize that the productivity problems stemmed from the supervisor's employees and not the supervisor himself. Otherwise the supervisor would not still be there. The company was trying to hire the person with the best qualifications for the job. Sometimes that includes personality. They didn't want to hire racist people, but people who are open minded.

--shlide

Edit: Had an extra "that" in there that really screwed up the meaning of the sentence. And tried to make it clearer.

shlide:quote:I do not feel that I was entitled to a free education. I am not claiming that because I paid my way through school that I was discriminated against. I am saying that there are specific grants/scholarships out there that are RESERVED for minority students. This, by definition, excludes me because of my race. Is that not racially discriminatory?

Sure. And athletic scholarships are "athletically discriminatory." Then you have scholarships for people with certain names and people from certain cities, so I guess we should work to end "name discrimination" and "location discrimination" next.

As for opportunities... Yes, today minorities have the SAME opportunities, but not necessarily an EQUAL chance to take advantage of those opportunities. For example, the lower entrance scores you claim can be so insulting and/or damaging to minorities are lower because of the disproportionate number of minorities who attend below average schools. I am sure you can figure out the correlation between your secondary school education and your college performance. I'll give an example of a race neutral solution to this particular problem: Here in Texas if you finish in the top 10% of your class in a public school you are guaranteed acceptance at state universities.

quote:I asked my parents about how they influenced my decision to go to college one time. They replied that they thought it was something I wanted to do. They never brought it up.

I still say that would make you the exception rather than the rule. I believe most kids who are in college would say their parents encouraged them to do so.

quote:Keep in mind that those who lowered productivity under the black supervisor were probably not promoted above him. Also, apparently the company was smart enough to realize that the productivity problems stemmed from the supervisor's employees and not the supervisor himself. Otherwise the supervisor would not still be there.

Those people who lowered productivity probably had already risen to the level of their ability. Moreover, just because the supervisor was not fired does not mean he had an EQUAL chance to succeed in the company. The opportunity was there minority and majority supervisors alike, but it was much harder for the minority supervisor to take advantage of that opportunity.

quote:For the record, I do NOT see "see the discrimination [I] might potentially face as the problem". I see the fact that there is discrimination against anybody as the problem. Neither side (not majority nor minority) has the moral high ground in my opinion.

If you end affirmative action you have eliminated only the discrimination that affects whites. Minorities will still face the same discrimination that hinders their ability to compete on an "level playing field." As I said before, if you know of a better way than affirmative action to counteract the effects of past and present discrimination let's hear it. I think you should make eliminating discrimination against minorities your primary goal if you want to get rid of the need for affirmative action. Otherwise, your claims of wanting to end discrimiantion and racism ring hollow.

Daisuke;--------------------------------------------------------------------------------1."Magical breaks" eh?2.How do you know that I am not some kind person who lives in a ghetto? 3.You don't have a clue about my race.4. So might I ask where "poor white trash" comes from?5. I mean, just because they are white, they MUST HAVE more breaks then the other races out there right?6.I live in a area that has about 10-12% unemployment. 7.And we have alot of different races here, and we are all poor.8.Funny isn't it, you take away money and we can all laugh about being poor, and not the color of our skin.

1. absolutely correct: don't assume other people get 'magic' because your's is shit.2.you like me have web access, hardware access, sufficient opportunity to avail of educational advantage to be able to read and write, and freedom of time and resources without fear ,to be able to express yourself intelligently and fluently within the dominant cultural mainstream.3. i assumed from your rhetoric and from your nick that you might be of asian heritage, but i did not presume to make note of it...my lil joke with your nick, a play on phonetics (note..not 'ebonics'-a term , and dare i say 'attitude', i was unaware of prior to my experience of Ars UBB)..was to elicit from you perhaps some acknowledgement if you identify with that....

now you have.

4. as i understand it; poor white trash= those people who are of european descendance, without sufficient wealth to be among the 'rich', and mostdebatable of all; 'trash'=worthless... if a 'nigger' is 'worthless' because he 'has done nothing to better himself'...is a 'white'? an 'asian'? who has done/not done the same?

...sure some 'folks' are born into poverty and distress regardless of ethnic/racial stereotype...and others 'fall from grace' through the events of their lives.. and some people seem unwilling or unable to change their lives... but how can you judge them 'unworthy'? have you been there done that? self-centred self-ignorant judgemental envious wanna-be(given)ingrates who cant accept another person 'getting a break' are the trash i see in my world.not everyone can be bill gates...(not many really want to be either- do they???)5. no. but are you championing the cause of the homeless deprived and exploited? they come in all colours, shapes and sizes... no, you are whinging about how someone got a privelege (which should be a right for all)...but only because you (apparently) didn't get it... you are attacking who got it..(and the softer target at that) ... not addressingthe issue. yup sure there are poor whites/asians/whatever...but u dont represent that... only your own self interest, by your arguments.6....i understood that college entry was open to application from across the nation, and that many in your country travelled great distance to relocate in the locale of the institution they enrolled in....did you make the effort to apply for colleges outside of your local area? did you have several alternative courses of study you were prepared to commit yourself to if you gained entry to one of them? were you prepared to take on part-time work and live frugally on your own, in a share-house or a 'dorm' to get through your studies ? ...i have some doubt about the relevance of 'where you live'...not your sincerity or about your genuine hardship... i'm not unaware of those kinds of things myself, but maybe you might have limited your own horizons...? 7. there are 'lots'TM of places with many different races represented among the inhabitants... and plenty of them have 'poor'-ness which i am quite sure exceeds the level of 'poor'-ness where you or i live......not EVERYONE is poor where you live , surely! there must be some who have their own homes, land, property, amenities, and priveleges.....8. ...saying? ...i think you might need to think more globally about things.... you sound like you and your 'pals' hang together..go nowhere, do nothin, and just bitch about 'people of difference' .if everyone where you live 'is in the same boat' , why are you differentiating? do you personally know all this stuff you are spruiking? i'm sorry, i can understand your frustration with the inhumanity and injustice of the world as it is... but i think you gotta get a bit more real..go out and make of your life what you can...and realise that nothin is perfect. my life is fucked. largely my own inabilities. but also being screwed by fucks who never deserved to live. ..but so what! i do what i can....best i can... without envy or fuckin some other poor schmuk- even tho i could....

BTW "magical breaks" was your term which i was quoting back at you....

when life has really fucked you around enuff..and you really have made all the genuine effort you can.. and you've realised the good bits you had were not because you earned them or had an innate right to them, ..then you will feel gladness to see someone else get a chance in life and not envy them. you might even begin to count your own good deeds among the injustices you thought were done to you. but then again you might stay forever fixated on how the world didnt give you a good life...and have never lived. i also never fill in the "are you (different)" boxes...

i'm a minority of one. entirely the same as everyone is....

edited typo's the fat fingered hunt n pecker ( ..er 'pecker has a different meaning over there doesn't it?)

[This message has been edited by dingobear (edited January 25, 2000).]

Daisuke;actually 'the queen' is german/english (by the way...what is english??anglo-celtic-norman-briton-etc etc......add a dash of roman)....and she married a greek......wonder if charles ticks those little 'are you ethnic ?' boxes...

my communicative skills are quite within the bounds of generally literate usage of the english group of living languages.........what's your problem?...none of the eight points i made in response to your assertions is intelligible to you?? mebe they stress your ability to consider alternative experiences of reality to your own limited understanding of it more than they challenge your capacity to interpret my use of english language.... more a problem of you not understanding materialist dialectics , than actual difficulty with my language dialect.

edit....damn, left out the 'n' in wonder edit again... double-damn forgot the '?' too

[This message has been edited by dingobear (edited January 25, 2000).]

[This message has been edited by dingobear (edited January 25, 2000).]

I think we all should be able to identify with any group and call ourselves what we like. I also think we must make sure everyone is "...playing on a level field" as Daisuke said. None of us should have artificial obstacles placed in our way. Political Correctness should not prevent a white middle class male from achieving fair rewards for his hard work any more than generational racial bigotry should not prevent a working poor filipina from achieving her dreams with hard work.

There are unqualified people who are promoted just because they are a minority just as there are unqualified people who are promoted just because they are a member of the majority. Those of us who are motivated to see equality of opportunity for all will keep trying to figure out how to empower the disempowered without disempowering the empowered. Those of you motivated by racial, ethnic, or gender bigotry will probably continue to look for ways to empower yourselves and disempower others different than you. I am reasonably sure that discussion won't change your mind. I just hope someday you will understand.

That pretty much sums up my current opinion after participating in this thread. I thank everyone on the many sides of these issues. I've learned a lot. Thanks

quote:There are unqualified people who are promoted just because they are a minority just as there are unqualified people who are promoted just because they are a member of the majority. Those of us who are motivated to see equality of opportunity for all will keep trying to figure out how to empower the disempowered without disempowering the empowered. Those of you motivated by racial, ethnic, or gender bigotry will probably continue to look for ways to empower yourselves and disempower others different than you. I am reasonably sure that discussion won't change your mind. I just hope someday you will understand.

Yeah, I finally got off my butt and figured out how to quote in ubb. Anyway, I couldn't agree more with that part of FR*'s post.

Bishop, It's clear to me that, like FR* said, we will probably not change each other's minds through this discussion. We both approach the issue from different angles. I guess that's all part of having a different past/personality. Since I realize this can be an engrossing issue, thanks for helping me keep this discussion as civil as possible. I too have learned a lot.

According to the Census Beuro and US law, if you pet Other as a choice you are added to the White group. Does anyone else think this is wierd? They will not allow multi-racial catagories but if you express that none of their catagories fit you are white!!

If you thnk about it, there is alot of "white" people. I mean you can only get Chinese people from China, Japanese from Japan, but you can get white people from Sweden to South Africa.MY GOD! WHITE PEOPLE ARE EVERYWHERE!*laughs*